Type collectors.

I’m curious how many of you plane buyers/collectors, collect a full set of type #’s? I’ve been toying with the idea. I have types all the way from type 5 up to type 18. I much prefer the types with the big adjuster, i feel it offers more surface area, and just plan feels better.

I need to take an inventory and see what types i actually have. Lot of work!

My biggest focus is Sargent. I blame Mike :-). I only have 1 type 1, but look for 1,2or3s, but have most of the types. I have a type 2 or 3 in everything except a 424 in the 400 series. I’m missing a 707 and a 711 in my 700 series.

I really want to know more about the 5400 series.

I have every # of type 11. I’m missing a couple of tannys.

l am working on a set of #4s. I’d like one of every type from 1 to 20. I know the type 1 and 2 will be difficult.

Speaking of types. I’m familiar with the type studies on bench planes for Sargent and Stanley, but how do you type say, block planes, and circular planes, and routers, and etc etc? I know leachs gives some specs on earlier/later models.

Still working on it (hence “hobby”). I am trying very hard to NOT go off the deep end like a local buddy I found that has over 2,000 planes that include OVER 100 #1s, OVER 150 #2s, the ENTIRE OHIO PLANE INVENTORY, etc. The guy is in his 80s and has been collecting for over 60-years. His home is a museum, to say the least!

Anyway, my collection is small and I hope that I chose a small enough niche to keep me busy without running me out of space and $$$.

Currently have the following Sargents:

407 Types 3, 4

408 Types 3, 4

409 Types 3, 3

414 Types 2, 3, 3, 4

415 Corrugated

418 Types 2, 3, 3

422 Type 2

424 Type 2

5408 very early/rare corrugated version of 408 All 5400 series planes were corrugated w/ horseshoe laterals

Wow, all those 1’s & 2 ’s. I think he needs to donate one of each to each of the ljs that participate on this thread n ;-))

All I collect for now are the Bailey type 11 corrugateds or any non typed v logo planes and so on. I currently have the type 11 #3c – #8c, 4 1/2c & 5 1/2c fractionals, #10 v logo. So my collection is small butt looking to add more as I find them.

-- I'm not clumsy.. It's just the floor hates me, the tables and chairs are bullies, the wall gets in the way AAANNNDDD table saws BITE my fingers!!!.. - Mike -

My collection is all users and I am not that fussy about the type. That being said, I probably most prefer type 14. They have most of the improvements, lateral adjuster, frog adjuster, raised ring for the knob and the raised rib at the toe and heel, deeper frog screw holes, raised rib for the frog to ride on, large depth adjuster nut, etc. Type 15 started the newer frog design, and really nothing got any better from there on.

I have Stanley’s 2 through 8 that are types 6 through 20. If I get a type 5 or earlier, it gets sold. I think they have more value to a collector than they do to me, as a user.

WhoMe: ”...Wow, all those 1’s & 2 ’s. I think he needs to donate one of each to each of the ljs that participate on this thread n ;-))...”

We can dream can’t we! Anyway, I talked with Charley (the mega-collector) last week at a local antique tool event and he told a story about getting over $3,000 for a really nice #1, and upon shipping the front knob got a chip in it. So the guy called him up and tried to finagle a partial refund (who wouldn’t). In true Charley style, he had the guy send the “chipped” knob back and he sent a good OEM replacement knob from one of his “others”. Not a peep out of the guy!... Must be nice… ;-)

As far as my “collection” goes, I concentrate on acquiring “users” in need of some TLC. I then do the whole refurb thing.. electrolysis, new japanning, new knobs & tote as needed, sharpen/replace the cutter as needed, etc. I even have a Hock blade on one of #418s and you would not believe just how much that improves usage. I fine tune all the OEM blades for use, but they can never be as good as the newer and thicker cutters out there. Even my #4 WoodRiver(WoodCraft), with its thicker cutter & chipper, blows all of the OEM cutters away. Just a simple fact that does NOT detract from the usefulness of old planes as users. In their day ~100yr ago they were the best thing available and got the job done.

That being said, I keep two or three as truly “users” but then completely recondition the others as “collectibles” in refurbed condition. That is part of the reason that I am interested in the early Sargents that are more fragile/lightweight.

Mike, have any issues with fitment of aftermarket blades? Was thinking of getting one for a #4 1/2 that is missing a blade. Tried the blade and breaker from my Lie Nielsen and it didn’t fit (which is no surprise as they do not guarantee it to on their site). Hock claims theirs WILL fit. How is that so if they’re the same thickness? Odd.

I’ve put a Hock in a Stanley #5 1/2 and my 604. Both worked well. Isn’t the adjuster hole on the LN different?

My experience is a little different then Mikes. I haven’t seen a difference in stock (assuming older and better, not the newer crap) cutters and Hock’s, other than there is not much fussing with a Hock, it works when it arrives. I wonder if the Sargent cutters were not as good? I haven’t used a Sargent enough to comment.